Intel revealed on Tuesday that the first wave of its next-generation Ivy Bridge processors will feature quad-core models, the bulk of which are headed for desktop computers, followed by a second launch of dual-core chips for "mainstream notebooks."

CEO Paul Otellini relayed the information to investors during a quarterly earnings call on Tuesday, as CNet.

"The first versions of Ivy Bridge that we're shipping are quad cores, and then bulk of those are going into desktops," Otellini said, according to a transcript by Seeking Alpha.

"And then the second launch of the products is in the dual core, which is the mainstream notebooks. So I think that helps put a profile over the course of quarter as well."

Intel pushed the Ivy Bridge launch back by three weeks in order to "make sure that there was enough inventory in the pipeline," the company's CFO said. The chipmaker is expected to launch its first batch of Ivy Bridge chips next week.

Otellini's comments could still leave room for a MacBook Pro release within the first wave of chips. Apple could potentially obtain enough inventory for initial MacBook Pro shipments even if the "bulk" of Intel's new processors are headed for desktops. Currently, both the 15-inch and 17-inch versions of the MacBook Pro make use of a quad-core Intel processor, while the 13-inch model has a dual-core processor.

Availability of 15-inch MacBook Pros has been constrained among authorized resellers, often a reliable indicator of an imminent update.
AppleInsider reported in February that Apple is planning a slimmed-down version of its 15-inch notebook that will draw upon the design traits of the MacBook Air, while a similar redesign of the 17-inch MacBook Pro is expected later this year.

An illustration of Apple's notebook lineup planned for the 2012 calendar year.

The lack of dual-core options in the first round of Ivy Bridge chips has led to speculation that an updated MacBook Air is not likely to arrive until the end of the second quarter at the earliest. The processors bound for Apple's next-generation MacBook Air and rivals' ultrabooks are expected to arrive in June.

Otellini's comments could still leave room for a MacBook Pro release within the first wave of chips. Apple could potentially obtain enough inventory for initial MacBook Pro shipments even if the "bulk" of Intel's new processors are headed for desktops.

Apple's volumes are so low, I think they they'd have no problem with an iMac and MBP release. They only ship 1.5 million total Macs per month so if you cut out the high volume, cheap Macs like the Mini and Air, you are left with under 300k iMacs and MBPs each.

By comparison, HP sells 5 million PCs per month so they'd need about 5-10x the chips Apple does for a proper launch as they don't have the same distinctions in product lines.

I wonder if we'll hear about a press event this weekend or if this will be a silent update. I still think a 15" MBP overhaul would make the 13" MBP look very odd as they are advertised in the same lineup.

To me, it would make more sense to update the iMac (and maybe the Pro) next week and then wait until June to update the other 3 models.

This just confirms that there will be few laptop capable processors shipping. If anything they will be limited to 15 @ 17" MBPs. Sad really but what can you do. Intel has slipped up big time over the last year and a half.

It may be a case of stockpiling CPUs for a launch. But as Marv notes, Apple's desktop needs are not those of HP.

In light of HP's ambitious AIO 'Z' design and the Pro's ten year old design I'd like to see Apple put its back into this year's models. We are overdue something after a somewhat evolutionary 2011...with no Pro at all that year. Apple have had plenty of time to design a more appealing and affordable 'Mac Pro.'

It would be nice for a top end iMac to have a Xeon option or quadro GPU.

Likewise, a cosumer/pro replacement that starts £995 and scales up to dual processors £2k+. How hard can it be to have a choice of two motherboards and a choice of desktop and workstation CPUs? With the same for GPUs? The Alleged Pro's problem is the base price which is twice its historical base price. It's one computer when it needs to be two. Most pc OEMs can do this.

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

This just confirms that there will be few laptop capable processors shipping. If anything they will be limited to 15 @ 17" MBPs. Sad really but what can you do. Intel has slipped up big time over the last year and a half.

In addition the roadmapped 77W TDP Ivy Bridges are showing up as 95W now - possibly due to minor 22nm process issues? It would explain why the mobile IBs are coming in June rather than April as originally planned.

In addition the roadmapped 77W TDP Ivy Bridges are showing up as 95W now - possibly due to minor 22nm process issues?

Could be a process issue, Intel is obviously struggling here however it could simply be a competitive stance. I will have to see the new listings but if the 95 watt parts offer no advantages, such as higher clock rates or larger caches then it likely is a sign of poor yields

Quote:

It would explain why the mobile IBs are coming in June rather than April as originally planned.

I'm not sure what the original plan was, I know Apple would have preferred to have the mobile chips first.

The Sandy Bridge Xeons just came out this year so, if we're going to see a Mac Pro this year, will be with those chips. The Ivy Bridge Xeons will only come out early next year at best.

It's currently Q2 of next year assuming no further delays. I recall Sandy Bridge E was pushed back due to bugs/stepping issues. Given that we're talking about workstation builds, Apple (and the others) would most likely use the same logic board for Sandy Bridge E and Ivy Bridge E. It was the same thing with Westmere. To see a real advantage, you had to look at the top core count chips. The board design was the same with updated firmware. I'm a little surprised the other oems aren't close to shipping new machines with sandy bridge E yet. I haven't heard anything on Dell/HP. Okay HP has the Z1 coming out, but I didn't note any of these parts used in it, and some of them seem quite hot for such a design.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone

Availability of the chips doesn't seem to matter much to Apple when it comes to the Mac Pro. They never updated it with Sandy Bridge Xeons at all.

Several in the appropriate socket type became available very recently. They were repeatedly pushed back. Appropriate Ivy Bridge cpus for the mac pro won't even be available until Q2 next year as i mentioned. Their release schedules are quite far off. I have to wonder if fabrication is becoming more difficult/costly for these guys.

Apple's volumes are so low, I think they they'd have no problem with an iMac and MBP release. They only ship 1.5 million total Macs per month so if you cut out the high volume, cheap Macs like the Mini and Air, you are left with under 300k iMacs and MBPs each.

By comparison, HP sells 5 million PCs per month so they'd need about 5-10x the chips Apple does for a proper launch as they don't have the same distinctions in product lines.

I'm a little surprised the other oems aren't close to shipping new machines with sandy bridge E yet. I haven't heard anything on Dell/HP. Okay HP has the Z1 coming out, but I didn't note any of these parts used in it, and some of them seem quite hot for such a design.

I've built two dual xeon Sandy bridge machines in the last month using Supermicro boards. Those machines rock. Every time I build one I wish I had the time to make a Hackintosh out of it, but alas they are all sent to the datacenter as servers.

Where is the rush? Apple has often trailed intel hardware releases by many months. Apple releases hardware on their schedule not, Intels and certainly not due to some Internet discussion.

Now I don't expect a Pro to come out that is just another bump to the current chassis. That doesn't imply anything about Sandy Brdige E nor any other chip they might use. What I'm saying is that there is more to new hardware than just the CPU chip. If you are really looking for a new and improved Mac Pro replacement you won't get excited over the fact that Sandy Bridge E was released a month ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone

Availability of the chips doesn't seem to matter much to Apple when it comes to the Mac Pro. They never updated it with Sandy Bridge Xeons at all.

I have been watching and waiting for the new iMac now for about three months. It will be my first Mac I am a heavy computer user (Not video rendering or scientific stuff) just work on it every day running some pretty hungry software building websites and research. I am sosooo tired of waiting I am on the edge of my seat about to hit the "buy it" key on a
iMac 27"
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive + 256GB Solid State Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$2,899.00

I'll add more memory myself...

another thought, and question is do you think the new upgrade will have a price hike as well?
Just needing a little input here to help me make my mind up...

Well,,,, really I was trying to make my mind up too about which mac but always leaning toward the iMac - Now I've made my mind up on it...
And I would add, I dont want to wait another month or two for a new Mac - Unless... It's a WHOLE LOT better than this one...

I dont know if the upgrade will make that much difference in what I do. Dont know if I would even notice it.... besides Ive read some rumors that the new design will be "thinner" Not that Id work mine enough to get it hot but if you already have heat issues and you make it thinner... that doesnt sound good to me...

Macs have quite a few proprietary parts. Power supply, motherboard, operating system, etc.

That's why Macs are so much more reliable than HP computers according to most surveys and while people are willing to pay a premium for Macs in some cases (although not as many as you might guess).

HP has definitely had some reliability issues, but Apple never comes out at the top of repair rate surveys/studies. I don't know if service is easier to obtain. If you live near an Apple store, it's easy to drop the machine off when it's under warranty, but genius bar staff generally aren't that helpful other than to take the machine in for repairs. I don't think I've owned a single problem free Mac, so they're not perfect either. The price difference varies depending on what you compare. They're fairly comparable when you're looking at 12 core workstations. It's usually within $500 in either direction. Both have problems, but the typical complaints are different. With HP it seems to be power supplies. Apple displays used to constantly end up with dead inverter boards. On certain models, Apple has experienced logic board problems. The repair costs on Macs are pretty high. HP is a little better in that regard, but it's still high whenever you're buying proprietary parts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mstone

I've built two dual xeon Sandy bridge machines in the last month using Supermicro boards. Those machines rock. Every time I build one I wish I had the time to make a Hackintosh out of it, but alas they are all sent to the datacenter as servers.

How much of an upgrade were they over comparable nehalem/westmere models? Reviews have been all over the place on speed, but supposedly they run quite hot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljocampo

Please Please Please Apple give me a new iMac. I need/want one in the may/jun time frame

Perhaps you should sacrifice a zune to Steve Jobs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wizard69

Where is the rush? Apple has often trailed intel hardware releases by many months. Apple releases hardware on their schedule not, Intels and certainly not due to some Internet discussion.

Now I don't expect a Pro to come out that is just another bump to the current chassis. That doesn't imply anything about Sandy Brdige E nor any other chip they might use. What I'm saying is that there is more to new hardware than just the CPU chip. If you are really looking for a new and improved Mac Pro replacement you won't get excited over the fact that Sandy Bridge E was released a month ago.

Given their design parameters, I wonder how much it would really change. I don't see the price going anywhere. I did mention the lenovo before, but it's still basically the same concept, only smaller. Assuming a desire for more than 2 TB ports, it means adding in another expensive chip. I don't know how many are supported or if it's simply limited by available PCI lanes. It'd be cool if you're right. If anything that would help convince people that they're still interested in the line, but they have certain parameters there. It's generally accepted that it should be silent or near silent, able to accommodate gpus comparable to what they have today, and it should address some of the more powerful available cpus. I have to wonder if they'll make the effort.

In addition the roadmapped 77W TDP Ivy Bridges are showing up as 95W now - possibly due to minor 22nm process issues? It would explain why the mobile IBs are coming in June rather than April as originally planned.

Of course, till chips and data "officially" show, this is all speculation, but charts and articles I have seen show that 77W TDP is still the plan for their first release of the desktop family chips, and with mobile series (projected June release) at lower TDP ranges.

Again, speculation, but some articles I have seen suggest that references to TDP of 95W for Ivy Bridge may be to define an upper limit to the power range for the whole Ivy Bridge family, and not necessarily be the wattage of the initial chips themselves. And also so that it matches the upper limit of the second gen i-series Sandy Bridge which were 95W - possibly to encourage a wider range of acceptability for mobos (both Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge using the same LGA1155 socket).

Regarding the anticipated early June release of additional Ivy Bridge including the wider mobile family, I think this is what has been planned, as per numerous leaks and tech web info. So I would not guess it being related to power over-consumption.

But hey, we are just making our best guess based on published and leaked info "as it develops" ... so time will tell ... Edited by Bruce Young - 4/20/12 at 3:35am

is there any chance that we would see any of these chips in a mac mini?, if so, when will apple launch them?

Considering the current Minis design I'd say no. I believe the Mini maxes out at 35 watts processor power except in the server model. Apple might be able to beef up the Minis power supply and cooling but you have to remember that they need to allocate more power to USB than before.

Quote:

Im considering purchasing a mac mini, being my first mac, but I dont know if waiting is a good option.

You might have to wait until June/July. The extra GPU performance would make that wait worthwhile though. I'm hoping for a majorly refactored line up so that is another factor.

This would be in time for WWDC. The entire lineup should be refreshed by then. It would be iMacs and MBPs this week and the MBAs and Minis at WWDC. It might be a better idea to just do the iMac now though. It will have a minimal redesign (no optical & slimmer) so doesn't need an event. I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.

The iMac update is long overdue so it needs to come as soon as the chips are available. The MBPs can wait until WWDC. A Mac Pro refresh isn't out of the question either but it will need a redesign so WWDC could be the place to intro it.

Quote:

What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.

Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.

The new MacBook.

Available in 11", 13", 15", and 17".

I think that's what they should do, especially if they decide to drop the Mac Pro. It will bring on the criticism that Apple is abandoning the Pros who saw them through the rough years etc but the fact is, you can be a professional tennis player and own an 11" Air. Professionals have many varied requirements so the stigma of Pro vs non-Pro is unnecessary.

Originally Posted by Marvin
A Mac Pro refresh isn't out of the question either but it will need a redesign so WWDC could be the place to intro it.

That's something I'd forgotten about… they released the first one at WWDC; why not release the redesign there? Come full circle…

Quote:

I think that's what they should do, especially if they decide to drop the Mac Pro. It will bring on the criticism that Apple is abandoning the Pros who saw them through the rough years etc but the fact is, you can be a professional tennis player and own an 11" Air. Professionals have many varied requirements so the stigma of Pro vs non-Pro is unnecessary.

I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.

It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…

I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.

It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…

… r-right?

ExpressCard is history, it's PCI like Thunderbolt except 1/4 the speed so no need to include it. I also think with the introduction of USB 3, it puts an end to FW800 and ethernet but a GigE USB 3 adaptor can be included.

I think Apple will go the route of SSD cards in these and they need to hit the same price points in the worst case, while managing to ship 256GB minimum overall storage. We're pretty close to $1/GB so the SSD will be around $250-300. The dedicated GPU is probably $200-300 and the optical $100. They could go with 128GB boot drives with big HDDs to maintain the dedicated GPU but it will be interesting to see which way they go. The HD4000 is not far off the 6490M they used to use but is about 1/3 of the current 6750M so probably not a good idea to downgrade it in an $1800 laptop.

That's something I'd forgotten about… they released the first one at WWDC; why not release the redesign there? Come full circle…

I don't think they should drop the Mac Pro, and I don't think that dropping the "Pro" name from the MacBook family will (should) in any way reflect on the "un-pro-ness" of the machines. The 15" and 17" will still have dedicated graphics, and the 17" will still have legacy ExpressCard/34 (unless they drop that, too…). They'll still be pro machines, and with faster CPUs to boot.

It's not as though Apple's going to just drop dedicated graphics across the whole line for the sake of making a range of four sizes of veritable MacBook Air…

… r-right?

Perhaps an option for 8 GB of RAM in the 15" Air allowing for the maximum amount for the Intel HD 4000. Leave a more powerful discrete option in a thicker 15" Pro?

Perhaps an option for 8 GB of RAM in the 15" Air allowing for the maximum amount for the Intel HD 4000. Leave a more powerful discrete option in a thicker 15" Pro?

As much as it sucks, I can't see Apple going for more than 4GB across the board, even in the 17". I imagine also that there will be one size (one design) for the new machines, and that the low-end 15" will simply run cooler than the one with discrete graphics.

I have been watching and waiting for the new iMac now for about three months. It will be my first Mac I am a heavy computer user (Not video rendering or scientific stuff) just work on it every day running some pretty hungry software building websites and research. I am sosooo tired of waiting I am on the edge of my seat about to hit the "buy it" key on a
iMac 27"
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
4GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
1TB Serial ATA Drive + 256GB Solid State Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$2,899.00

I'll add more memory myself...

another thought, and question is do you think the new upgrade will have a price hike as well?
Just needing a little input here to help me make my mind up...

Well,,,, really I was trying to make my mind up too about which mac but always leaning toward the iMac - Now I've made my mind up on it...
And I would add, I dont want to wait another month or two for a new Mac - Unless... It's a WHOLE LOT better than this one...

I dont know if the upgrade will make that much difference in what I do. Dont know if I would even notice it.... besides Ive read some rumors that the new design will be "thinner" Not that Id work mine enough to get it hot but if you already have heat issues and you make it thinner... that doesnt sound good to me...

I'm getting very nervous... I'm afraid If I dont do something pretty soon my wife will take my Mac Money and buy a new living room suit or something... HEEELLLLPPPP!!!! :-(

As much as it sucks, I can't see Apple going for more than 4GB across the board, even in the 17". I imagine also that there will be one size (one design) for the new machines, and that the low-end 15" will simply run cooler than the one with discrete graphics.

Oh I just mean in the ones were RAM would be soldered on. Is 4 still the max? I would guess so?

not1lost - That's kind of lame. If it's money set aside for both of you, okay. If you really need a new living room set vs. a new computer, okay. Otherwise that is YOUR money and YOU should keep it for YOUR new MacBook Pro.

Read the chart. The chips coming available fit those product lines almost perfectly. In fat the iMac would be highly likely for an update. Same as with the MBPs. Remember Apple can only ship / update machines for which Intel has suitable processors.

45 watts might seem like a lot for a MBP but one has to take into account just how integrated that chip is.

As for the Mini well here is the rub, I believe Apple could design a Mini using the chips that are about to ship. The question is do they want to squeeze a 45 watt chip into that box. Last I remember they only had a 65 watt power supply for the entire load within the Mini. Even if they bump that to 85 watts you have to remember that they would need to allocate power to the USB 3 ports and Thunderbolt ports. That could easily be another 30 watts of power. In the end I think Apple will look for another solution beyond this chipset release.

Quote:

Quote:

I think the slim 13" MBP will mean a convergence between Air and Pro, which means a June 5th launch.

Not if Apple is just getting rid of the 13" MacBook Pro. There's no point to it anymore. They have the 13" Air to handle that.

If the AIRs where all that great the current 13" MBP would not be selling as well as it is. I'm not sure why people don't grasp this but the AIR is and likely will be for some time performance constrained compared to the MBP, eve the 13" MBP.

Quote:

What I see being controversy (meaning here, not in the real world, and meaning 'from the anti-Apple idiots here', not from us as a whole) is Apple dropping the "Pro" from the name.

Because you know it makes sense. The designs will be nearly the same after this revision (hopefully), so having just four models and one family seems logical.

The new MacBook.

Available in 11", 13", 15", and 17".

I don't think that distinction between the two models will be dropped. The exact name might not change but there will still be a huge gap between their performance machines and the so called AIRs. When people by MBP's that is what they expect, higher performance and increased capabilities over the run of the mill AIRs.

The difference between the MBPs and the Mac Pro is that Apple actually sells the MBPs in rather large numbers. The 13" MBP still out sells the AIRs and the other MBPs are leaders in their classes.